1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 26, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract to purchase KRW 55 million (10 million on the date of the contract, the balance of KRW 45 million shall be paid on April 26, 2015) with the purchase price of KRW 47.01 square meters (hereinafter “instant house”) of the cement C-based C-based cement C-based, Gyeyang-gu, Gyeyang-gu, the Defendant owned on March 26, 2015 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). The indication of real estate under the instant sales contract is written as “the superficies (47.01 square meters of house in Gyeyang-gu, Yangyang-gu)” and the special agreement is as follows. The seller is the seller’s transaction of superficies (a cement and a branch house in Gyeyang-gu) in Gyeyang-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, with the remainder of superficies (hereinafter “cement and a branch house in the name of superficies”). At the same time, at the same time, the seller shall keep documents to transfer the name of superficies.

The annual rent shall be 1.5 million won (paid on November 17 of each year).

However, the copy of the register of E, F, G, and H land register, the owner of the instant land located, was registered as the co-ownership by J and E, but the J succeeded to the 1/2 shares of E, his/her spouse, and F, G, and H, his/her children, as his/her spouse, upon death on November 26, 2007. On July 16, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Plaintiff for removal of the instant house, delivery of the land, and return of unjust enrichment, and the judgment of winning the lawsuit became final and conclusive on July 12, 2017.

(Reasons for recognition) : (a) the fact that there is no dispute; (b) the entry of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings; and (c) the purport of the whole pleadings; (d) the statement of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 (including paper numbers)

2. Determination:

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant is obliged to establish a superficies on the instant housing and transfer it to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff did not perform this, thereby causing damage to the Plaintiff, such as the removal of the instant housing from the land owner. Therefore, the Plaintiff sought compensation against the Defendant.

B. Therefore, as alleged by the plaintiff, whether the defendant has the obligation to establish and transfer superficies shall be examined, and evidence and evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, and 5 mentioned above shall be proved.